Should bakers and other vendors be allowed to refuse service to gays and lesbians, specifically when it comes to marital ceremonies? No, argues one gay couple who have filed a discrimination complaint against a Colorado baker who refused to provide them with a wedding cake.

Masterpiece Cakeshop, owned by Jack Phillips and based near Denver, Colorado, is at the center of the dispute after David Mullins and Charlie Craig attempted to order the baked good from the business last summer.

Phillips, declining to provide service after learning of the couples sexuality, cited his Christian beliefs. But Mullins and Craig arent accepting Biblical arguments as a viable basis for the refusal.

From now on,bakers are on notice...if a pervert “couple” comes to you for a “wedding” cake don't refuse to make it....just make it so badly that everyone attending will wish they had never seen it.”Accidentally” mistake the jar of salt for sugar and give them a cake they'll never forget.And when they complain,cheerfully refund the price of the cake.

6
posted on 06/23/2013 1:32:28 PM PDT
by Gay State Conservative
(The Civil Servants Are No Longer Servants...Or Civil.)

As I see it, this is quite similar to slavery. Do as I tell you to do because I am your Master, is the subtext here.

A free man or woman can choose who they associate with or do business with. A slave can’t, they MUST do as their master tells them to do.

And this is not about the money the couple is willing to spend. This is about FORCING someone who disagrees with them to do as they tell him to, whether he/she wants to do so. And if that is not a type of Slavery then What is it?

No. Their wishes and conscience should be respected. Consitutionally, the Feds should leave marriage to the States and/or the people themselves but also, the Constitution defend freedom of thought, expression and so forth so if it offends these bakers to do this, they should have their wishes respected and not be stigmatized or punished. Let the free market work, I’m sure there are other bakers who will make such cakes. Putting people in jail because they act on their convictions, one way or another is wrong.

If parents were making sure that their children were taught the Constitution and its history, then it’s questionionable how young a child could be who could point out the following concerning constitutional precedence. Given that the states have amended the Constituton to expressly protect religious expression, the Constitution silent about marriage and so-called gay rights, the freedom of religious expression, applied to the states by the 14th Amendment, basically trumps any 10th Amendment-protected state laws which protect marriage and gay rights.

Close. What destroyed the sanctity of free association was the Brown vs. Board decision in 1954. When it declared -- in violation of logic and law -- that "separate is inherently unequal," it offered business operators and anyone in a "public accommodation" no protection from being forced to serve anyone who could crawl in the door.

There has been no definitive ruling on whether precedent requires a business owner to violate his own religious beliefs, but considering the tenor of rulings on religious freedom over the last half a century, it is dubious that they will triumph the manufactured "right" of queers and perverts to demand inclusion under Brown.

Many more of us are going to have to risk jail if we're to resist this scourge.

It boiled down to the commerce clause. People argued, correctly I believe, that they could not travel in certain parts of the country because they could not find places to stay and to eat. In this case, it is a specialty service. I don’t think it could be argued that it limits interstate commerce.

As I understand it, a business can refuse service to anyone but not on the basis of overt discrimination, specifically, race - although gender is often included. The Colorado bakery is 'discriminating' on the basis of the prospective client's 'sexual orientation'. One has to assume that if the state is bringing discrimination charges against the bakery owners, such a definition exists on Colorado state law. The Christian couple that own the bakery believe homosexual behavior to be a sin, based on biblical scripture. Their spiritual conscience does not allow them to participate in that sin (baking a cake for the ersatz 'wedding') and so they refused the order.

If Colorado laws forbids refusal of a business service based on 'sexual preference' of the potential customer, as in the Masterpiece Bakeshop case, the bakery owners can be charged and fined. However, as The Blaze article points out, Americans have a constitutional right to the practice of their religion. The bakery refusing to bake a 'wedding' cake for a same-sex couple may be technically discriminatory but the real point here is to force acceptance of homosexuality down the throats of those who reject it and make the supposed 'right' of homosexual men or women trump that of those who disagree with their choices on religious grounds.

This was likely a well planned set-up as in a city like Denver, there must be plenty of bakeries that would make a wedding cake for anyone who had the cash. The cake isn't the point. Making homosexual behavior 'mainstream', by force, is. This should be interesting when gays try to force a Muslim business to service them in a way clearly connected to their homosexuality. Oh, wait, they won't. Muslims will burn your house down if you dare offend 'allah'. Christians politely refuse and face the legal consequences. Meanwhile, Americans keep having their individual rights abridged, by law. In the distant future, historians will have a field day examining the decline and eventually demise of America. This case may be an example.

Then the fags would have you arrested for a terrorist act and attempted murder. Heard from my wife about an incident very much like that at her place of work; what used to be considered a practical joke in bad taste, wound getting the perpetrator a jail sentence.

Brothers and sisters, the time is coming when we may actually have to suffer for the faith. Christians have had it very easy in this country until now. We may have to put some skin in the game. “A religion now worth dying for, is not a religion worth living for.” We may have to endure government persecution with acts of civil disobedience as the martyrs did in early Christianity. Most of all refrain from violence. We are not Muslims.

We have to be careful about saying someone doesn’t have the right to refuse business.

I’m a freelance writer, among other things. I’ve been asked to write copy for adult products and synthetic marijuana. I’ve refused. Was offered a higher pay rate. I refused, citing my religious beliefs. They found someone else to write it. Given rulings like this, do I lose the right to refuse work?

Well, Paula Dern just ‘lost’ her job with one of the reasons being she was planning or had planned a wedding on a plantation ala 1800’s and she had planned on being periodical.
The much ballyhooed “Slave Museum” in Fredricksburg VA was told it couldn’t have ‘slave quarters’ or depict ‘slave auctions’. They had so many ‘restrictions’ thrown on them that it finally went bankrupt. AND Blacks were running it. (Former Gov Wilder).

Imagine if I went into a Black bakery(?) and ordered a cake with a ‘Tom Sawyer’ theme, don’t even think ‘Tar Baby’ or any ‘Uncle Remus’ themes....

They have got it so that if, in the work place, you compliment a woman on her hairdo, dress or demeanor you may be charged with Sexual Harassment - you know, because he said it ‘that’ way.

If you say nothing other than the good morning or goodbye in the evening, they can charge you with running an unfriendly, hostile work place.

That's a recurring theme ~ the gay blades already don't like someone so they concoct a phony cookie or cake conflict then sue.

The correct approach is to simply do a bad job of it. Good example of 'bad job' is to bake it 2 days ahead of schedule and apply 2 layers of icing (or maybe a week ahead ~ there are experts in this who know what it takes).

That harms no one ~ but the cake will achieve a consistency similar to cardboard near the surface. Demand a significant advance deposit, in cash.

Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.